ROHTASH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this criminal revision, the petitioner/convicts-Rohtash, Devinder and Man Singh have challenged the dismissal of their appeals by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari through judgment dated 21.07.2008 as well as their initial conviction by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rewari through judgment dated 30th July, 2004 in case bearing FIR No.82 dated 04.5.1998 under Sections 323, 325 read with Sec. 34 Penal Code registered with Police Station Kosli, whereby they are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Sec. 323/34 Penal Code and two years and a fine of Rs.500.00 each under Sec. 325/34 Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each.

(2.) It is by complaint Ex.PW-4/A, complainant-Mahabir alleged that on 19th April, 1998 around 10.00 p.m. he had gone to see video film at the chopal of the village and at that time someone had thrown a stone hitting on the back of one Devender and it is thereafter, a fight ensued, which was put to an end by the intervenors. It is subsequent thereto, complainant- Mahabir, his father-Surat Singh and brother-Dharambir were coming to their house after patching up the matter and on the way accused -Lachhu Ram intercepted them and gave Mussal blow on the left side of the head of Surat Singh whereas Devender gave a blow on the head of the complainant, Man Singh gave a blow of lathi on the right ear of Surat Singh while Lachhu gave blows of mussal on the left hand of Surat Singh and two consecutive blows on the back of the Surat Singh as well as on both the legs. This accused gave further blows on the right shoulder of the complainant. All the victims were also given fist blows and leg blows by the accused and in the process of this, Rohtash caught Dharambir and Devender gave lathi blow on his left hand and on raising alarm, the accused ran away leading to registration of the case.

(3.) Upon investigation, the challan was submitted. At the trial, the prosecution examined PW1-Dr. Chitranjan, PW2-HC Om Parkash, PW3- Surat Singh, PW4-Mahabir Singh, PW5-Dharambir, PW6-Surender and PW7-SI Bhojraj and thereafter, closed the prosecution evidence. The accused denied the offences but did not lead any evidence, thus, leading to passing of judgment of conviction. The accused/convicts challenged the judgment of conviction through two appeals which were disposed off together.